Folks, I will say this about the latest Ryan Sorba video: you don’t need to go undercover to reveal the Democrats’ penchant for embracing any sexual lifestyle that is outside the bounds of one-man/one-woman marriage. More and more social liberals–who always follow the “progressives'” lead–are jumping on the “polyamory” (multiple-partner) bandwagon. Sorba’s description of the video follows the jump and the video. — Peter LaBarbera, AFTAH; Twitter: @PeterLaBarbera

_____________________________________

Ryan Sorba writes:

Published on Jun 22, 2015

Recently, I went undercover posing as a same-sex marriage activist and asked prominent gay activists and Democrats the following question:

“If the purpose of marriage is to confer dignity upon individuals who love each other, then what about polygamous couples who love each other? They should be able to marry too, don’t you think?”

Shockingly, the gay activists and Democrats all answered, “Yes!”

In one exchange, Daniel Lathbury, chair of the East Bay Young Democrats admitted to knowing “poly-amorous couples” and supporting them.

In another, California Lieutenant Governor Gavin Newsom declares that he will support a girl in a “poly-amorous triad!”

In yet another exchange former “gay” Congressman Barney Frank’s husband Jim Ready responds to whether or not he is in favor of marriage for polygamists. He answers, “If they love each other!” I then stated the question a second time, “I think they should be able to get married if they love each other!” and he replied, “I agree!”

There is much more!

Is it any wonder that these liberal Democrats now support polygamy, poly-amory, and who knows what else? Gay activists have been indoctrinating Democrats for years. Their central tenant has been and continues to be the notion that the whole case for marriage is that it is strictly about “love.” All the while they have played down the fact that anybody can self-report to love anybody, or any number of bodies, or anything for that matter. If love really is the basis for marriage then the definition of marriage is actually limitless, albeit not yet explicitly declared.

Fortunately, romantic love is not the “essence of marriage.”

Stay tuned until the end of the video, where you will hear the complete case for marriage, which is grounded in human nature and discernible by the light of reason. The, “What about infertile couples?” rebuttal will be overcome. The, “What about heterosexual incest?” rebuttal will be overcome, and the, “What about heterosexual polygamy?” rebuttal will be overcome. Please listen to the whole monologue at the end. Additionally, the reason why those who self-identify as “gay” should not raise children will be made crystal clear.

Please Donate: Please donate $5, $10, $25, $50 or more to help me to continue to conduct investigations like this. I would like to do this full time rather than as a volunteer, but I can’t do it without the generosity of people like you. I am working on putting $1,000 together for my next project. You can help meet that goal here: http://www.gofundme.com/rightontheedge.